It's me. I'm the degenerate. My degeneracy may even be enough to make the trip from Sacramento for the late night game because my work schedule happens to be conducive.
Any word if we are Toshing any other members of their coaching staff before the game or just Sirmon?
Great, again, Chris. You know, we assume, probably too much, that our coaches have all this information, but not necessarily the insights you provide. They might be wise to be keeping up with your blogs, here. Better yet, if they are looking for a part time consultant.... ;)
That’s an excellent point. While it’s probably not true, I can’t help but get the impression sometimes that the W4C staff, and some P12N/ESPN/FOX analysts, have a better eye for diagnosing plays/coverages than the Cal players/coaching staff.
I have an inkling that we will bounce back and play well. UW has been weak on the road (ASU, UCLA). But with Hearns potentially out or not at full strength our back-up may be picked on. Need to pressure Penix. I've never especially liked left handed throwers because of the weird mechanics they sometimes have. The Takers 2.0 will take at least a couple.
How many will show up? 30,000? 35,000? I know I'll be comfy at home sipping a glass of red wine for the after dinner spectacle on ESPN. Actually it's a good opportunity for the Bears to turn things around after another head-scratcher.
I would guess no more than 30k. Old Blues and Cal fans with kids/families don’t like night games. We might get a few more students show up but if it gets ugly early, most will disappear by halftime.
I’m one of the degenerate Cal diehards. Love the Bears, can’t afford therapy (but I pay for Sling), Often stay up late till the increasingly common bitter ends (east coast resident now), and read all TOS (I hope that means “The other sites!” lol).
Good list. Hard to argue with your top 4. But I like de Laura higher. He just absolutely shredded Cal's defense to the tune of 400 plus throwing yards in Cal's house. The late stumbles in that game were because he was pressing with the score. You pair him with a good defense, and he's right up there. And Cam Ward really stumbled on the road at OSU. WSU had just one yard in the first quarter.
We will find out Saturday if Bo Nix is still in the middle of the pack. He either goes lower or he goes higher. Don't think he stays there.
Since I know you're waiting for this, here are my QB rankings so far this season:
1. Caleb Williams (USC)
2. Dorian Thompson-Robinson (UCLA)
3. Tanner McKee (Stanford)
4. Cam Rising (Utah)
5. Cam Ward (Wazzu)
6. Jayden de Laura (Arizona)
7. Bo Nix (Oregon)
8. Jack Plummer* (Cal)
9. Chance Nolan (OSU)
10. Michael Penix Jr (UW)
11. Emory Jones (ASU)
12. Owen McCown (Colorado)
It's hard to rank some of them, because even the "bottom" QBs are still pretty good, and there isn't all that much differentiating them. Caleb Williams and DTR are heads and shoulders above the rest of the pack as the Mahomes/Lamar Jackson of the Pac-12. Tanner McKee is the best passer, but Stanford is wasting his talent. Cam Rising isn't as elite of a passer, but he's tougher than anyone running the ball (Josh Allen?). Ward, de Laura, and Nix are all athletic dual threat QBs prone to boom-or-bust play. Plummer, when healthy (that's the asterisk) is a pretty good passer with surprising escapability. Same story with Nolan, who I think is also dealing with injuries and struggling this season as a result. I think Penix Jr benefits from fantastic receivers, but I'm not a fan of his inconsistent throwing mechanics. Emory Jones is another run-first QB, but his backup in the UW game, Trenton Bourguet, actually looked pretty sharp. Owen McCown is just too green.
Maybe I have some blue and gold tinted glasses, but I definitely don't think it's that cut and dry (and as I said, I think those QBs are all close together).
My sole criteria when doing those rankings are whether or not I'd trade one QB for the other. I'm also gratuitously ignoring some bad throws from Plummer since the ND game when I think he was hurt and consequently isn't stepping into his throws properly. Plummer and Penix are both similar in that they could both improve just by cleaning up their throwing mechanics, but I give the edge to Plummer because there is simply no way Penix (phone autocorrect is killing me here) would have the same success Plummer would behind Cal's offensive line. Plummer does a much better job of staying poised under pressure and after being hit 30 times in a game, whereas I imagine Penix would be downing himself if he had to play behind a porous offensive line the way Plummer does. Plummer has been able to withstand pressure, escape the pocket, and improvise. Penix is hitting wide open receivers from a super clean pocket. I could see Plummer taking Penix's place, but not vice versa. So I gave Plummer the edge for that.
It's definitely not a huge difference between the two, though. We're talking 7th rounder vs UDFA signing.
I hear you...just disagree, and again, respectfully. I'll never give anyone a hard time for having blue and gold tinted glasses...unfortunately, mine broke years ago after multiple seasons of Cal sports. ;-)
That said, IMO, Plummer has looked his best in practice...his form rarely translates to game action, tho, admittedly he's been under a tremendous amount of pressure. He's consistently missing reads, including Sturdivant matched up 1 on 1 with a LB in the RZ at Folsom Field. He's often slow on processing as well - the ball needs to be out...just cut it loose. And Jack has struggled with accuracy from the first game v. UC Davis - he rarely hits guys in stride, so not sure any injury was the behind Saturday's misfires.
Penix has been the better quarterback on two different teams now, and in the same conference so we can actually compare. MP Jr was a better QB at Indiana than Plummer in West Lafayette, and he's the better QB at Washington. I'd bet Penix would be just fine with Ott in the backfield, slinging it to J Mike, Mavin, Hunter and now Mason Starling, who looks legit. Plummer certainly has some ability - you can see why he's won the job at Purdue and Cal, but his decision making, accuracy and execution are part of the problem on this years Bear team. All too often, you can see why he lost the job to Aidan O'Connell, with the protection again definitely being a factor.
But again, appreciate and enjoy your work...ranking player lists are always very debatable.
So, what’s the criteria here? And here’s a legit question, CH, and relevant after watching how poorly the backup QBs have faired in Wilcox’s 6 years: which of these backup QBs could come in when called upon and get their team a win? That’s arguably the sign of a well coached offense in a healthy program.
It’s not a catch and honestly not really that close. Starling sure has the ball in his hands but possession was never established since Trevor Woods was there in literally half a second.
My rule of thumb is possessing the ball for just over a second or survive the ground/context on the catch depending on the scenario. So in this case we would go with the just over a second of possession which really just goes towards a common sense judgement. Obviously Starling didn't fulfill this requirement and I also don't believe this would've been a catch in the NFL despite the breaking the plain rules because he didn't possess it long enough. Like you could replay this 100 times each over in slow mo and in real time and only come away with thinking that was a catch 2% of the time.
That's a very slippery slope because people have different definitions of a catch in the endzone. Truthfully its a judgement call influenced by time supporting possession and I and about 90% of Cal fans agreed with that call. It's subjective like you're implying but I'm in their boat. Plus it is clear that's not the play that lost us the game.
ARTICLE 3. a. To catch a ball means that a player:
1. Secures firm control with the hand(s) or arm(s) of a live ball in flight
before the ball touches the ground, and
2. Touches the ground in bounds with any part of the body, and then
3. Maintains control of the ball long enough to enable that player to
perform an act common to the game, i.e., long enough to pitch or
hand the ball, advance it, avoid or ward off an opponent, etc., and
4. Satisfies paragraphs b, c, and d below.
b. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or
without contact by an opponent) the player must maintain complete
and continuous control of the ball throughout the process of contacting
the ground, whether in the field of play or in the end zone. This is also
required for a player attempting to make a catch at the sideline and going
to the ground out of bounds. If the player loses control of the ball which
then touches the ground before they regain control, it is not a catch. If the
player regains control inbounds prior to the ball touching the ground it is
a catch.
c. If the player loses control of the ball while simultaneously touching the
ground with any part of their body, or if there is doubt that the acts were
simultaneous, it is not a catch. If a player has control of the ball, a slight
movement of the ball, even if it touches the ground, will not be considered loss of possession; the player must lose control of the ball in order for there
to be a loss of possession.
d. If the ball touches the ground after the player secures control and continues to maintain control, and the elements above are satisfied, it is a catch.
e. An interception is a catch of an opponent’s pass or fumble.
f. A catch by any kneeling or prone inbounds player is a completion or
interception (Rules 7-3-6 and 7).
g. A player recovers a ball if they fulfill the criteria in paragraphs a, b, c, and
d for catching a ball that is still alive after hitting the ground.
h. When in question, the catch, recovery or interception is not completed.
To your question, it says
"Maintains control of the ball long enough to enable that player to
perform an act common to the game, i.e., long enough to pitch or
hand the ball, advance it, avoid or ward off an opponent, etc."
It also says "When in question, the catch, recovery or interception is not completed."
My view is that there is definitely potential and perhaps a higher ceiling than recent Cal teams, but we are hamstrung by conservative, predictable play calling and spotty execution. We should be on the edge of the upper tier Pac-12 teams. One of my questions is that we spend three quarters at a slow pace, then midway through the 4th quarter Plummer perks up and starts completing passes, as happened against Notre Dame and Colorado because we start running tempo so why not run tempo throughout the game?
It's me. I'm the degenerate. My degeneracy may even be enough to make the trip from Sacramento for the late night game because my work schedule happens to be conducive.
Any word if we are Toshing any other members of their coaching staff before the game or just Sirmon?
Thanks for the article Christopher! Rough game.
ONLY TWO POSSIBILITIES FOR CAL, VIZ. MORE SACKs AND MORE PASS INTERFERENCE CALLS!
Hi fellow degenerates.
No matter how much pain Cal inflicts, there is always hope.
Cal did discover the element Hopium after all.
Hopefully we can score 20
Will #10 play? Coach Wilcox was super cagey about him @ CU?
We talked to Coach yesterday and he seemed rather bullish about Femi playing so I guess we will have to wait and see on Saturday
Great, again, Chris. You know, we assume, probably too much, that our coaches have all this information, but not necessarily the insights you provide. They might be wise to be keeping up with your blogs, here. Better yet, if they are looking for a part time consultant.... ;)
That’s an excellent point. While it’s probably not true, I can’t help but get the impression sometimes that the W4C staff, and some P12N/ESPN/FOX analysts, have a better eye for diagnosing plays/coverages than the Cal players/coaching staff.
We gotta' hope it's not true. Otherwise, guys like Chris should be getting the big bucks.
I have an inkling that we will bounce back and play well. UW has been weak on the road (ASU, UCLA). But with Hearns potentially out or not at full strength our back-up may be picked on. Need to pressure Penix. I've never especially liked left handed throwers because of the weird mechanics they sometimes have. The Takers 2.0 will take at least a couple.
Memorial will be so empty it won’t feel like an away game for UW.
How many will show up? 30,000? 35,000? I know I'll be comfy at home sipping a glass of red wine for the after dinner spectacle on ESPN. Actually it's a good opportunity for the Bears to turn things around after another head-scratcher.
I would guess no more than 30k. Old Blues and Cal fans with kids/families don’t like night games. We might get a few more students show up but if it gets ugly early, most will disappear by halftime.
Even my mom who is a die hard fan and never misses a home game without cause is debating going to this one.
Forsett and Lyncch will be there
https://calbears.com/news/2022/10/18/football-bears-host-huskies-saturday-night.aspx
That's good. Let's make Lynch the OC.
This will be the 3rd left-handed quarterback our defense plays this year. Sort of uncanny.
"The Devil's Hand."
So you’re saying there’s a chance?
Honestly, I could see Cal pulling the upset and then sucking us all back into their vortex of despair.
We'll get our hopes up, then they will once more be irrevocably dashed.
Like winning this one and losing to Furd?
The team is a mess but I won't be surprised if we beat the Huskies this weekend too.
Make Marshawn and Forsett proud!
Thanks
I’m one of the degenerate Cal diehards. Love the Bears, can’t afford therapy (but I pay for Sling), Often stay up late till the increasingly common bitter ends (east coast resident now), and read all TOS (I hope that means “The other sites!” lol).
Another great write up with sobering insight.
Go Bears!
You don’t find it interesting that nobody on the files complained about or questioned the call?
In interest of disclosure, Chitwood’s 2022 P12 QB rankings, all the way from Indiana, courtesy of Strap’s family bus…
1. Caleb Williams (USC)
2. Dorian Thompson-Robinson (UCLA)
3. Cam Rising (Utah)
4. Michael Penix Jr. (Washington)
5. Cam Ward (Wazzu)
6. Jayden de Laura (Arizona)
7. Bo Nix (Oregon)
8. Tanner McKee (Stanford)
9. Emory Jones (ASU)
10. Chance Nolan (Oregon St)
11. Jack Plummer (Cal)
12. Owen McCown (Colorado)
Good list. Hard to argue with your top 4. But I like de Laura higher. He just absolutely shredded Cal's defense to the tune of 400 plus throwing yards in Cal's house. The late stumbles in that game were because he was pressing with the score. You pair him with a good defense, and he's right up there. And Cam Ward really stumbled on the road at OSU. WSU had just one yard in the first quarter.
We will find out Saturday if Bo Nix is still in the middle of the pack. He either goes lower or he goes higher. Don't think he stays there.
I gave Ward a pass because his WRs killed him at Reser with drops. They had a bad night. I still think Penix and Ward are on an NFL roster as rookies.
I do like DeLaura, and he should probably be ahead of Nix, TBH.
**Fixed**
Since I know you're waiting for this, here are my QB rankings so far this season:
1. Caleb Williams (USC)
2. Dorian Thompson-Robinson (UCLA)
3. Tanner McKee (Stanford)
4. Cam Rising (Utah)
5. Cam Ward (Wazzu)
6. Jayden de Laura (Arizona)
7. Bo Nix (Oregon)
8. Jack Plummer* (Cal)
9. Chance Nolan (OSU)
10. Michael Penix Jr (UW)
11. Emory Jones (ASU)
12. Owen McCown (Colorado)
It's hard to rank some of them, because even the "bottom" QBs are still pretty good, and there isn't all that much differentiating them. Caleb Williams and DTR are heads and shoulders above the rest of the pack as the Mahomes/Lamar Jackson of the Pac-12. Tanner McKee is the best passer, but Stanford is wasting his talent. Cam Rising isn't as elite of a passer, but he's tougher than anyone running the ball (Josh Allen?). Ward, de Laura, and Nix are all athletic dual threat QBs prone to boom-or-bust play. Plummer, when healthy (that's the asterisk) is a pretty good passer with surprising escapability. Same story with Nolan, who I think is also dealing with injuries and struggling this season as a result. I think Penix Jr benefits from fantastic receivers, but I'm not a fan of his inconsistent throwing mechanics. Emory Jones is another run-first QB, but his backup in the UW game, Trenton Bourguet, actually looked pretty sharp. Owen McCown is just too green.
Love your work, Christopher, and respect you, but in no world is Jack Plummer a better quarterback than Michael Penix Jr.
Maybe I have some blue and gold tinted glasses, but I definitely don't think it's that cut and dry (and as I said, I think those QBs are all close together).
My sole criteria when doing those rankings are whether or not I'd trade one QB for the other. I'm also gratuitously ignoring some bad throws from Plummer since the ND game when I think he was hurt and consequently isn't stepping into his throws properly. Plummer and Penix are both similar in that they could both improve just by cleaning up their throwing mechanics, but I give the edge to Plummer because there is simply no way Penix (phone autocorrect is killing me here) would have the same success Plummer would behind Cal's offensive line. Plummer does a much better job of staying poised under pressure and after being hit 30 times in a game, whereas I imagine Penix would be downing himself if he had to play behind a porous offensive line the way Plummer does. Plummer has been able to withstand pressure, escape the pocket, and improvise. Penix is hitting wide open receivers from a super clean pocket. I could see Plummer taking Penix's place, but not vice versa. So I gave Plummer the edge for that.
It's definitely not a huge difference between the two, though. We're talking 7th rounder vs UDFA signing.
I hear you...just disagree, and again, respectfully. I'll never give anyone a hard time for having blue and gold tinted glasses...unfortunately, mine broke years ago after multiple seasons of Cal sports. ;-)
That said, IMO, Plummer has looked his best in practice...his form rarely translates to game action, tho, admittedly he's been under a tremendous amount of pressure. He's consistently missing reads, including Sturdivant matched up 1 on 1 with a LB in the RZ at Folsom Field. He's often slow on processing as well - the ball needs to be out...just cut it loose. And Jack has struggled with accuracy from the first game v. UC Davis - he rarely hits guys in stride, so not sure any injury was the behind Saturday's misfires.
Penix has been the better quarterback on two different teams now, and in the same conference so we can actually compare. MP Jr was a better QB at Indiana than Plummer in West Lafayette, and he's the better QB at Washington. I'd bet Penix would be just fine with Ott in the backfield, slinging it to J Mike, Mavin, Hunter and now Mason Starling, who looks legit. Plummer certainly has some ability - you can see why he's won the job at Purdue and Cal, but his decision making, accuracy and execution are part of the problem on this years Bear team. All too often, you can see why he lost the job to Aidan O'Connell, with the protection again definitely being a factor.
But again, appreciate and enjoy your work...ranking player lists are always very debatable.
Go Bears!
I agree. Penix is rated way too low on his list.
Now do their backups.
1. Trenton Bourguet (ASU)
2. Ethan Garbers (UCLA)
3. Noah Fifita (Arizona)
4. Ben Gulbranson (OSU)
5. Ty Thompson (Oregon)
6. Miller Moss (USC)
7. Sam Huard (UW)
8. Kai Millner (Cal)
9. Bryson Barnes (Utah)
10. Ari Patu (Stanford)
11. JT Shrout (Colorado)
12. John Mateer (Wazzu)
So, what’s the criteria here? And here’s a legit question, CH, and relevant after watching how poorly the backup QBs have faired in Wilcox’s 6 years: which of these backup QBs could come in when called upon and get their team a win? That’s arguably the sign of a well coached offense in a healthy program.
Wazzu's backup is a true freshman who hasn't played at all. I've at least seen a bit of Millner at the Cal spring game. Majority of those QBs
have just played garbage time.
It’s not a catch and honestly not really that close. Starling sure has the ball in his hands but possession was never established since Trevor Woods was there in literally half a second.
My rule of thumb is possessing the ball for just over a second or survive the ground/context on the catch depending on the scenario. So in this case we would go with the just over a second of possession which really just goes towards a common sense judgement. Obviously Starling didn't fulfill this requirement and I also don't believe this would've been a catch in the NFL despite the breaking the plain rules because he didn't possess it long enough. Like you could replay this 100 times each over in slow mo and in real time and only come away with thinking that was a catch 2% of the time.
That's a very slippery slope because people have different definitions of a catch in the endzone. Truthfully its a judgement call influenced by time supporting possession and I and about 90% of Cal fans agreed with that call. It's subjective like you're implying but I'm in their boat. Plus it is clear that's not the play that lost us the game.
Here's a good video on this that compares to Starling where the backjudge rules correctly but gets overruled: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLSyB9HZBL4
"but there is no firm rule on that."
you just answered your own question.
He didn't maintain possession of the ball so that was not a TD.
I wasn't sure actually. It seemed like he caught it and had possession. But then slapped away in less than a second.
He definitely caught the ball, but I think that was way too short. Esp. since he completely lost the ball.
He doesn't have to move, but he can't lose the ball.
https://www.dfoa.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/2021-NCAA-FB-Rulebook.pdfhttps://www.dfoa.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/2021-NCAA-FB-Rulebook.pdf
Catch, Interception, Recovery
ARTICLE 3. a. To catch a ball means that a player:
1. Secures firm control with the hand(s) or arm(s) of a live ball in flight
before the ball touches the ground, and
2. Touches the ground in bounds with any part of the body, and then
3. Maintains control of the ball long enough to enable that player to
perform an act common to the game, i.e., long enough to pitch or
hand the ball, advance it, avoid or ward off an opponent, etc., and
4. Satisfies paragraphs b, c, and d below.
b. If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or
without contact by an opponent) the player must maintain complete
and continuous control of the ball throughout the process of contacting
the ground, whether in the field of play or in the end zone. This is also
required for a player attempting to make a catch at the sideline and going
to the ground out of bounds. If the player loses control of the ball which
then touches the ground before they regain control, it is not a catch. If the
player regains control inbounds prior to the ball touching the ground it is
a catch.
c. If the player loses control of the ball while simultaneously touching the
ground with any part of their body, or if there is doubt that the acts were
simultaneous, it is not a catch. If a player has control of the ball, a slight
movement of the ball, even if it touches the ground, will not be considered loss of possession; the player must lose control of the ball in order for there
to be a loss of possession.
d. If the ball touches the ground after the player secures control and continues to maintain control, and the elements above are satisfied, it is a catch.
e. An interception is a catch of an opponent’s pass or fumble.
f. A catch by any kneeling or prone inbounds player is a completion or
interception (Rules 7-3-6 and 7).
g. A player recovers a ball if they fulfill the criteria in paragraphs a, b, c, and
d for catching a ball that is still alive after hitting the ground.
h. When in question, the catch, recovery or interception is not completed.
To your question, it says
"Maintains control of the ball long enough to enable that player to
perform an act common to the game, i.e., long enough to pitch or
hand the ball, advance it, avoid or ward off an opponent, etc."
It also says "When in question, the catch, recovery or interception is not completed."
Are we a good team???
My view is that there is definitely potential and perhaps a higher ceiling than recent Cal teams, but we are hamstrung by conservative, predictable play calling and spotty execution. We should be on the edge of the upper tier Pac-12 teams. One of my questions is that we spend three quarters at a slow pace, then midway through the 4th quarter Plummer perks up and starts completing passes, as happened against Notre Dame and Colorado because we start running tempo so why not run tempo throughout the game?